I am stupid, selfish, crazy and do not understand SCIENCE - Page 2

[MittensKittens]

Originally Posted by peainthepod 

It's easier to call someone ugly names or insinuate that they're just not smart enough to question the self-proclaimed experts than it is to answer their sincere questions.

Questions like:

Where are the double-blind placebo safety studies for vaccines? You know, the actual science? Why are new vaccines only tested against older versions of the same vaccine?

Where are the studies proving that administering combinations of vaccines, as seen on the current CDC schedule, is safe for all children regardless of size, medical history, allergies, and age?

Why can't patients and parents/guardians of patients legally sue pharmaceutical companies for the damages their vaccines cause? Who benefits from such an arrangement?

Why are vaccines, unlike every other pharmaceutical drug on the market, assumed by medical professionals and government agencies to be completely safe with almost no chance of side effects or adverse reactions, despite the large volume of documented evidence to the contrary?

When did informed consent become less important than vaccine "compliance", and why? Again, who benefits from this wild shift in medical ethics?

Why does the pharmaceutical industry wield such enormous power in Washington, and why are the numerous conflicts of interest within the government agencies that shape official vaccine policy never explored by the mainstream media or congressional committee?

Oh well, I guess it's just easier to call us stupid and lazy. I'm sure Dr. Offitt would never lie about his own product, and it's just a coincidence that the former head of the CDC now has a very cushy job at Merck. Stop asking questions and by the way, did you hear that Jenny McCarthy posed for Playboy? She can't possibly have anything worthwhile to say. But Amanda Peet? She might just be an actress, but she's a mom too and I trust her.

In all seriousness, I'm sorry you felt hurt and attacked. Plenty of people poo-poohed a link between thalidomide and birth defects at first, but that didn't make the skeptics any less correct. Questioning conventional wisdom is never popular. It doesn't matter though, because the only person who needs to be comfortable with your vaccine decision-making is you. 

And another question based on a recent experience a friend had - why do doctors still insist on another dose of the MMR vaccine when a titre check showed the child already gained immunity?

Kathy, sorry you feel like that. I, too, don't discuss my vax decisions with random people on the web. But one thing is certain. If I, an intelligent professional, don't understand science, neither do other people who work in unrelated fields. Why is their decision to vax more valid than mine not to?

[purslaine]

Originally Posted by AerialistEm 

If they were completely secure with their decision to vaccinate, they wouldn't be abusive and hateful to people that don't. Deep down, they feel uncomfortable that they are taking the risks of vaccines and you aren't.

^^^  Ma2Two is so wise. 

And I'm sorry for my rant yesterday about baby boards... I was feeling peevish.  Here's the hug you requested. 

Oh, my goodness - that was no rant.  Try being the only non-vaxer is a sea of vaxxers, lol.   It is all good.  

Thanks for the hug.

[Bokonon]

Originally Posted by ma2two 

If they were completely secure with their decision to vaccinate, they wouldn't be abusive and hateful to people that don't. Deep down, they feel uncomfortable that they are taking the risks of vaccines and you aren't.

I haven't really found this to be true.

I find that many (not all, by any stretch of the imagination) of the really pro-vax parents I know, especially the abusive ones, just can't fathom why someone would rather have their child get a disease than a shot.  They don't see adverse reactions as being common or a big deal, and deny that serious reactions are related to the vaccines at all.  They get angry because people who don't vax for whatever reason "screw up herd immunity", putting everyone at risk!  :eyeroll

I've seen many, many parents call non-vaxers "child abusers" and "quacks".  It's easy to point fingers and believe that vaccines are 100% good and diseases are 100% bad until the lines start blurring, your child has a vaccine reaction and/or gets a VPD despite being fully immunized.

Talk about mommy wars - this seems to be the most vicious one in cyberspace. 

[Casha'sMommy]

I also agree with Ma2Two.

If they were truly comfortable with their decisions why wouldn't they do their best to educate you in the way we might do the same here???

Deep down they know they've not done the research or don't have the strength to advocate for their child and stand up for what they know isn't right. My SIL is the exact same way! She knows she's doing wrong but she cannot say no to that darn dr! I hate what's happening to my nieces and I've tried to help but I have NEVER, EVER belittled her or yelled at her or been abusive towards sil in any way!

Cate

[purslaine]

Originally Posted by Casha'sMommy 

I also agree with Ma2Two.

If they were truly comfortable with their decisions why wouldn't they do their best to educate you in the way we might do the same here???

Deep down they know they've not done the research or don't have the strength to advocate for their child and stand up for what they know isn't right. My SIL is the exact same way! She knows she's doing wrong but she cannot say no to that darn dr! I hate what's happening to my nieces and I've tried to help but I have NEVER, EVER belittled her or yelled at her or been abusive towards sil in any way!

Cate

Thanks.  To be honest, some people did try to engage me in conversation ( as stated above, probably to try and convert me, lol.)  It was really hard to get to a respectful discussion place with the all the visciousness going on, though.  

I have had way more luck on MDC discussing things respectfully - including discussion on the main vaccinating page where pro-vaxxers regularly submit info.  

[littlec]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle 

Thanks.  To be honest, some people did try to engage me in conversation ( as stated above, probably to try and convert me, lol.)  It was really hard to get to a respectful discussion place with the all the visciousness going on, though.  

I have had way more luck on MDC discussing things respectfully - including discussion on the main vaccinating page where pro-vaxxers regularly submit info.  

I agree. I've learned a lot from the pro-vaxers here on MDC (hasn't changed my opinion but gives me things to think about and research), and nothing but nothing like that from people on other boards.

[Casha'sMommy]

I think it's like that here because we're all like minded in many ways even if we don't agree on everything.

We are respectful of one another because that's who we all tend to be and that just rarely leads to any of us being defensive.

imho

[skyblufig]

There you go, and may I just say, I am also stupid, selfish, crazy and scientifically-challenged.  It was explained to me the other day (sort of screamed to me actually) that I am "selfish because I/we expect everyone else around us to vax so that we have the luxury of not vaxing!" (exclamation point and emphasis is their's).  I had to gently point out that, No, I expect everyone else around us to do their own research and do what they feel is best for their own family.  Just like we do with ours. I know the exact feeling you speak of, so here's another  

      

[ma2two]

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyblufig 

It was explained to me the other day (sort of screamed to me actually) that I am "selfish because I/we expect everyone else around us to vax so that we have the luxury of not vaxing!"

No, I expect everyone else around us to do their own research and do what they feel is best for their own family.

I guess they never stopped to think--if you expect everyone else around you to vaccinate for your child's safety, why would you be encouraging others to do their own research, which could lead them to stop vaccinating?

And it kind of makes you wonder--if they think not vaccinating is a luxury, why do they think their own kids don't deserve that luxury?

[skyblufig]

Originally Posted by ma2two 

Quote:

I guess they never stopped to think--if you expect everyone else around you to vaccinate for your child's safety, why would you be encouraging others to do their own research, which could lead them to stop vaccinating?

And it kind of makes you wonder--if they think not vaccinating is a luxury, why do they think their own kids don't deserve that luxury?

Word. 

And I'm happy I'm not the only night owl around here. 
 

[peainthepod]

Originally Posted by ma2two 

And it kind of makes you wonder--if they think not vaccinating is a luxury, why do they think their own kids don't deserve that luxury?

This is another argument that makes no sense to me. Saying I'm "selfish" for not vaccinating my child (for the greater good/herd immunity/children who can't be vaccinated for medical reasons, etc.) is an admission that vaccinating a healthy child is not without risk, that it could have unwanted side effects. In the same breath these people will usually then insist that vaccinating children is perfectly safe and that risks are rare or non-existent. So which is it? Either vaccinating is potentially harmful or it's completely safe. Since not even dietary supplements are purported to be completely safe, I think there's a bit of cognitive dissonance going on here. The parents who call me selfish for not vaccinating presumably took the risk with their children's health, so I should do the "selfless" thing and drug my healthy child too. If we all do it, then the benefit to society will somehow outweigh the risks we take when we inject powerful pharmaceutical drugs into our healthy babies' bodies.

No thanks. My children are not communal property and I'm not going to preemptively drug them "for the greater good". Adults who think this way are welcome to get all the vaccines they want, and their children's medical decisions are of course their own to make whether I agree with them or not, but if anything I find this to be an argument against compulsory vaccination, not for it.

If vaccines are completely safe, vaccinating your own child shouldn't be any kind of sacrifice. If it's a sacrifice to vaccinate a healthy child, then vaccines aren't completely safe and it's unbelievably presumptuous (not to mention unethical) to pressure parents to drug their children just because you did. Informed consent has to be both.

Edited by peainthepod - 7/11/11 at 7:45am

[purslaine]

Originally Posted by skyblufig 

There you go, and may I just say, I am also stupid, selfish, crazy and scientifically-challenged.  It was explained to me the other day (sort of screamed to me actually) that I am "selfish because I/we expect everyone else around us to vax so that we have the luxury of not vaxing!" (exclamation point and emphasis is their's).  I had to gently point out that, No, I expect everyone else around us to do their own research and do what they feel is best for their own family.  Just like we do with ours. I know the exact feeling you speak of, so here's another  

      

Bolding mine.  Totally agree.  Were you blasted on the internet or in person?  

[sosurreal09]

I literally have tears in my eyes reading this b/c i hate hate hate! that people have this strong opinion about it being abuse! My DD suffered horrible, painful reactions that "are not considered reactions but rather coincidence" (even though it reoccured after being free of it all for 6 months when we tried to vax her again with only an isolated vax...) But oh yeah I should have continued on with it b.c of course the vax was not to blame and my DD should have just suffered through it all...

We went through HELL absolute HELL b/c of the Freaking vaccines!!!! I wish I had researched earlier. i stopped vaxing b/c of research *I* didn't even know that all my DD's medical problems were from the vax until we stopped vaxing and she magically got all better! Then I vaxed her again with an isolated vax (talked into it stupidly) and most of her problems came back..this time it took longer for her body to heal and finally after 5 months of not vaxing again she is healed.

I am so happy her issues were reversible but I am horrified that I would not be so lucky the next time or the next child so we are so not vaxing anymore!

I have been attacked verbally for not vaxing my DD...no one cares that she had several reactions to the vax...all they can stinking think about is "herd immunity"

"Oh but reactions are like freakishly rare" and all right? HA not so much...
 

Originally Posted by Bokonon 

I haven't really found this to be true.

I find that many (not all, by any stretch of the imagination) of the really pro-vax parents I know, especially the abusive ones, just can't fathom why someone would rather have their child get a disease than a shot.  They don't see adverse reactions as being common or a big deal, and deny that serious reactions are related to the vaccines at all.  They get angry because people who don't vax for whatever reason "screw up herd immunity", putting everyone at risk!  :eyeroll

I've seen many, many parents call non-vaxers "child abusers" and "quacks".  It's easy to point fingers and believe that vaccines are 100% good and diseases are 100% bad until the lines start blurring, your child has a vaccine reaction and/or gets a VPD despite being fully immunized.

Talk about mommy wars - this seems to be the most vicious one in cyberspace. 

[UpToSomeGood]

The problem with the anti-vaccination movement is that it's riddled with pseudo-science in with the science.  That can make it an easy target for pro-vaccination people, and can result in throwing out the baby with the bathwater when someone's considering anti-vaccination arguments. 

In a sense the only solution for someone to make sense of vaccination is to do a lot of reading for themselves from various sources.  A major problem does rear its head here, though, because it is obviously hard for a layperson to tell junk science from real science.  But in this case it is really true that the mainstream establishment has misinformed the public to some degree.

In my own case, I used to be extremely pro-vaccination to the point that I instantly disregarded any anti-vaccination argument as nonsense, because of the perceived reliance on junk science (which isn't true of all arguments of course).  What I found when I really dove into some studies opened my eyes, particularly regarding the pertussis vaccination problem, and how poor vaccination strategies may have exacerbated the pertussis problem by creating a large number of partially suppressed but contagious pertussis cases, along with encouraging the growth of nastier strains of the bug.

ETA: Clarified with "perceived"

Edited by UpToSomeGood - 7/11/11 at 12:39pm

[ammiga]

Originally Posted by UpToSomeGood 

The problem with the anti-vaccination movement is that it's riddled with pseudo-science in with the science.  That can make it an easy target for pro-vaccination people, and can result in throwing out the baby with the bathwater when someone's considering anti-vaccination arguments. 

In a sense the only solution for someone to make sense of vaccination is to do a lot of reading for themselves from various sources.  A major problem does rear its head here, though, because it is obviously hard for a layperson to tell junk science from real science.  But in this case it is really true that the mainstream establishment has misinformed the public to some degree.

In my own case, I used to be extremely pro-vaccination to the point that I instantly disregarded any anti-vaccination argument as nonsense, because of the reliance on junk science.  What I found when I really dove into some studies opened my eyes, particularly regarding the pertussis vaccination problem, and how poor vaccination strategies may have exacerbated the pertussis problem by creating a large number of partially suppressed but contagious pertussis cases, along with encouraging the growth of nastier strains of the bug.

The same can be said about the pro-vaccine side of things.

[UpToSomeGood]

Originally Posted by ammiga 

The same can be said about the pro-vaccine side of things.

Not really.  Pseudo-science is different from science in that it does not depend on (valid) peer review, etc.  We don't really need to argue about the differences between true and false science, do we?  The problem with the CDC et al. is best stated as some misinformation of the public, not reliance on junk science. 

So, for example, when you go to the websites of some anti-vaccination advocates, you will find that they are hawking homeopathic remedies.  This sort of thing makes those particular people an easy target for instant dismissal by someone, and can make it easier to paint ALL the anti-vaccination arguments as nonsense (which they're not).  There's not any mud like that that we can sling at pro-vaxxers.  We can of course point to FLAWS in certain scientific studies, though those studies will tend to be actually scientific.

Another way of looking at it: there's a difference between incorrect science or bad science, and junk science which is not science at all.  You certainly may have some compelling arguments that vaccinations are founded on bad or incorrect or questionable scientific results, but that doesn't mean that vaccinations are based on nothing scientific.

[peainthepod]

And yet testing new vaccines against older versions of the same vaccine is considered legitimately scientific because it's "peer-reviewed", even though a high school freshman could find the obvious problems with such methodology.

A very flawed experiment's results being vetted by a panel of experts doesn't make it into science. It just makes it accepted by that panel of experts. "Pseudoscience" is a subjective term and not one that vaccine marketers should throw around, since vaccine trials as conducted today are laughably unscientific.

And no, I'm not into homeopathy. I'm into evidence-based medicine.

[UpToSomeGood]

This may help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science

[peainthepod]

Originally Posted by UpToSomeGood 

This may help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science

Yes, thank you for this helpful and informative post. I see you addressed none of my points and managed to be condescending at the same time. Nice work!

Edited by peainthepod - 7/11/11 at 8:40am

[SilverMoon010]

I agree to the extent that some people may view vaccines this way, but I  believe there are far more people who don't even research vaccines at all, assume they're completely safe, basically keep their heads in the sand, and listen to everything their doctors tell them (sheeple - no one on here of course).  These types of people believe that vaccines can do no wrong and cannot phathom for a second why someone would choose not to vaccinate, especially to keep the "herd" protected. (I really hate the word "herd" anymore. It's certainly an overused terms these days!)  Those who can sit there and say they are completely safe should really do some research.. 

Originally Posted by peainthepod 

Saying I'm "selfish" for not vaccinating my child (for the greater good/herd immunity/children who can't be vaccinated for medical reasons, etc.) is an admission that vaccinating a healthy child is not without risk, that it could have unwanted side effects. In the same breath these people will usually then insist that vaccinating children is perfectly safe and that risks are rare or non-existent. So which is it? Either vaccinating is potentially harmful or it's completely safe.